Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2002 12:50:39 -0400
From: Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Updated: binutils-20020706-1
Message-ID: <20020706165039.GC30296@redhat.com>
Reply-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References: <20020706060443 DOT 1576A1C355 AT redhat DOT com> <20020706105628 DOT 51502 DOT qmail AT web21001 DOT mail DOT yahoo DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20020706105628.51502.qmail@web21001.mail.yahoo.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23.1i

On Sat, Jul 06, 2002 at 03:56:28AM -0700, Nicholas Wourms wrote:
>Just out of curiosity, what's the difference between binutils-20020629 and
>binutils-20020630?  Why would the former work fine with gcc-2 and the
>latter not?  I thought you had changed the alignment in binutils-20020629
>to accomodate java?

Nope.  No special alignment in 20020629.  That was the reason for 20020630.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/